April 26, 2011

"... by requiring them to present identification with an up-to-date address on it. The plan, which according to Republicans would curb voter fraud, has been raising eyebrows of young people all across the state. By voiding student IDs and other proofs of residence as a legitimate source of identification, the potential law would require constituents to obtain IDs through the local DMV. Not only would this law be costly for students, but it would need to be a yearly commitment. Students are a mobile group, as they continuously look for more reliable and economic places of living, a change on their ID cards would need to accompany the already-burdensome process of moving. A reliable Democratic vote, the student voting bloc would be reduced to those willing to change their ID cards repeatedly."

"Students are a mobile group, as they continuously look for more reliable and economic places of living, a change on their ID cards would need to accompany the already-burdensome process of moving." Bullshit - they will stay, on average, in college for five years pissing away the family's money.

I remember seeing Chrissie Mathews doing his show at a college campus for a state election. He asked the throng who they supported? I would have asked a different question- show me an ID so I can weed out those who were not even eligible to vote in that state.

substantially affect students’ voting rights. ..The hundreds of out-of-state students, many of whom may already be legally able to drive, would need to join their fellow in-state students and pay $28 to acquire another ID, just for the sole purpose of voting

If they are out of state students, they shouldn't be voting in Wisconsin.

First, the law requires current address on DL, so they should already be doing that. Second, this is sheer stupidity:

"because the chances of a single person swinging an election are slim-to-none, a person would need to repeat the process of obtaining different student IDs many times in order to turn the tide of an election." Uh, or maybe, just maybe, thousands of students doing the process just once."

You know, like the 10,000+ overvotes in Dane County and Milwaukee?

All you have to do is look at the aprty that doesn't want any ID required, and have same day registration, to know who is the party of fraud.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that a college student's legal address was where they went between semesters, not where they happen to live on (or slightly off) campus. So while most college students would be eligible to vote in their hometown/city via absentee ballot, they aren't eligible to vote where they go to school. A couple pretty good clues as to the student's legal residence are the address on their financial aid form and whether or not their parents claim them as tax dependents. At least that's the way it was when I was in college back in the stone age, a.k.a. the 1980s.

What's the issue here? Wisconsin DMVs are staffed by super-efficient and friendly unionized employees. The whole process will be a snap, those college kids won't have to burn more than 10 or 15 minutes getting their IDs.

So these brilliant young minds, being molded by what we've been told are the finest practitioners of the art of education, are presumed incapable of properly documenting their address for voting purposes? Shocking. Here's an idea, treat electoral violations as seriously as they treat athletic violations. Players and coaches are routinely ousted for malfeasance, but those who use the Campus to subvert free and fair elections get nothing more than a memo suggesting corrections.

@garage mahal - I guess you missed the voter registration fraud that recently occurred in Coloradoi'm like others what is wrong with presenting a photo id when one votes. have we forgotten the Illinois vote count in the 1960 presidential election? or what about the Democratic Senatorial primary in Texas in 1948. Box 13 mysteriously appears with just enough votes to put LBJ over the top. or what about the shenanigans involving the esteemed Senator Franken's election? Democrats don't want rules they want anarchy when it comes to elections. just look at their union partners who have been pushing for card check, can't have secret ballots in union elections can we?

I say more power to the legislature. here's something else are these students paying Wisconsin income taxes?

Republican "voter fraud" claims are just people not voting for Republicans.

Nice sound bite. But, it should be interesting to see the effects of fraud reduction legislation in voting in different states in the next national election. My guess is that the states that have enacted these measures will move right more quickly than those that maintain voting systems where voter fraud is much easier. I am thinking of states like Ohio, and, if this passes, maybe Wisconsin.

Of course, garage may be correct, that voter fraud is not an issue. But, I would suggest that his position is the minority position here.

So, someone who at 18 or 19, not going to school but perhaps working full-time and thus paying taxes, shouldn't be able to vote? What if they're married? What if they have kids? What if they're taking on what ordinarily would be considered the responsibilities of adult life? They shouldn't be able to vote until 21?

Compared to the paperwork and hassle involved to be allowed to purchase cigarettes, purchase alcohol, register my kid for Little League, write a check at the grocery store, get into a theme park, make a purchase with a credit card at a fast food restaurant, or any number of other mundane activities, it hardly seems an undue burden for people to make a minimal effort to verify that they are eligible to engage in one of the most precious activities we enjoy in this great nation.

College students get to vote once in each election, if they are 18. Either at home where mom or dad and all their stuff is, or in the college town they are living in. Wherever they want to register to vote, and with the DMV and their insurance that is their permanent address, then they get to. But if the insurance agent and the DMV think one place is home, and the election officials think another place is home, then there is a problem. Just be consistent. For example if they make Madison their voting home, then they need to update their drivers license and registration every time they move. If they keep Lodi, where the parents are as home, then their college address is temporary, and not on their DL and not where they register to vote. Not so hard. Unless they are entitled whiners.

To be sure, living independently of the parents means changing address with the DMV and voter registration everytime they move. But they have to change their address at the post office, and with utilities as well. Moving is a hassle. Most people don't move a lot and we don't need to have voter registration to favor a small subset of the population which engages in a behavior most of the population doesn't.

In Wisconsin you do not have to have your current address on your ID, but you do have to have it in the system. My driver's license will not reflect my current address for another year, when I renew it. But the DMV does have my current address in the system. They used to give you a sticker to put on the back of your ID, but they don't even do that anymore.

Garage, voter fraud historically and realistically has always been in the entrenched domain of the leftard. If they can't win fairly, they cheat, if they can't cheat fairly, they sue. If you choose not to see that, then that's your problem. Besides, if it's good enough for Iraqi's to jam their fingers in purple dye to show they voted, then why wouldn't it be good enough for a student or a leftard. I'd do it in a heartbeat if I knew that it would diminish voter fraud or eliminated completely.

Simon, while I can appreciate your concern in the aggregate, it's problematic at the individual level. Some people will be unthoughtful throughout their lives; others are thoughtful out of the starting gate. In addition, I think we need to infantilize young adults less, not more: thus my position in support of the franchise for 18-year-olds AND my lack of sympathy for any whining as to how burdensome it might be for their having to document their eligibility to vote in a particular place.

I felt that the mobility of my college existence made voting for the mayor, city council, or referendum on how many people needed to be on a garbage truck crew, or what housing ordinances ought to be, was irresponsible. I didn't live there. How dared I make choices for the people who did?

reader_iam, I certainly agree that there are individuals who are exceptional, but elections are in the business of aggregates. It strikes me that the average eighteen year old will not have developed the knowledge, experience, and maturity to vote responsibly. For example, I had not, none of the teenagers I know have (with one exception, but we are dealing in the business of aggregates), and exit polling of how teenagers actually vote seems to confirm the point.

Given a free hand, I would raise the voting age to 24 and impose a history and civics test. (Not to mention eliminating a number of the offices subject to election.)

I voted from my college address after I, 1) established my status as as independent from my parents in Minnesota and, 2) established Fargo as my permanent address, including changing my driver's license.

It's not that hard.

And if you want to be a dependent of your parents, still, you can get an absentee ballot and vote on issues important to your home.

If Republicans were interested in poor people having the right to vote they would make getting a drivers License a nominal fee like ten dollars. But you can bet they will raise it past a hundred.

I would bet against you on that JR.

You lefties can throw insults and prop up straw men all you like, but the party of fraud is the one that supports a system that allows 10,000 overvotes in an election.

No student is being denied the right to vote in their place of legal residence. That's what absentee ballots are for. The linked article is a blatant defense of a system designed to dilute the franchise of local legal voters. This is not an honorable stance.

If Republicans were really concerned about voter fraud and wanted to make sure everyone had an equal opportunity to vote they would support a national I.D. card and fund an uniform system across states that makes sure there is no multiple voting. This I.D. card could double as a Social Security card and would cost voters nothing.

But Republicans are not really concerned about voter fraud. Instead, their goal is to discourage poor people and young people from voting.

This is something on which you and I will no doubt continue to disagree. I think your proposed cure (in particular, the age issue) is worse than the disease, especially given historic rates of voting among young adults. Eighteen-year-olds are considered adults with regard to contracts; with regard to the criminal justice system; with regard to eligibility to serve in the military (and, in the past--and perhaps in the future, who knows?--to be drafted in such) and so on and so on and so on. I just can't support efforts with regard to the voting franchise that penalize the responsible in order to shut out the irresponsible (especially when I don't agree with the OTHER premise embedded in your argument: that is, that with increased age automatically comes increased responsibility with regard to voting).

I do, always, appreciate the chance to discuss such things with you, however (as well you know : ) ).

If Republicans were really concerned about voter fraud and wanted to make sure everyone had an equal opportunity to vote they would support a national I.D. card and fund an uniform system across states that makes sure there is no multiple voting.

JR, the Democrats howl if you ask voters to be able to produce anything like a state-issued non-drivers ID card in order to vote. In fact, I agree that a national ID system that could be used to verify actual living human beings were the only ones to vote, and that each one voted only once per election and only where they were legal residents, would be a huge benefit to society. And yes, make it free to citizens to enroll, by all means.

Trust me on this, it ain't going to be Republicans who keep such a system from happening. Not when Dane County can deliver 10,000 more votes than voters.

Synova, you are making a public fool of yourself by providing no argument with your ad hominem attack.

A Social Security card is considered I.D. Why not expand the usefulness of that card so that we can guarantee that there is no voter fraud? The reason Republicans will not support this is because they are not really concerned with voter fraud. They just want to disenfranchise poor people and the young.

No Lance, I provided an argument. There are ways to further protect against voter fraud without disproportionately making it harder for the poor and the young to vote. Republicans are not interested in these solutions. They obvious reason is that they are not really concerned about voter fraud. Instead they want to make it harder for poor people and the young to vote.

If Republicans were really concerned about voter fraud and wanted to make sure everyone had an equal opportunity to vote they would support a national I.D. card and fund an uniform system across states that makes sure there is no multiple voting. This I.D. card could double as a Social Security card and would cost voters nothing.

But Republicans are not really concerned about voter fraud. Instead, their goal is to discourage poor people and young people from voting.

If we want real true comparisons to totalitarianism, national identity cards are a great place to start. Then we will tell doctors that everybody has a right to health care, and this doctor needs to be there so they get it. Then we will tell businesses where they may and may not work.

The poor in America throughout the Cold War, were much better off than the poor in the USSR or Red China.

As we're going down the drain, the circling gets faster and the circles get smaller.

A Social Security card is NOT considered ID. You are never asked to present your Social Security card when opening a bank account because it is not ID. The bank will do a data base reference and determine if the SS matches your information.

As a Notary Public, I can NOT accept it as ID. Immigration does not accept a Social Security card as identification.

If the required ID cards necessary for voting aren't free, wouldn't that be akin to a poll tax and thus violate the XXIV amendment? If not, How expensive would an ID card have to be to be considered a poll tax?

Mark has left a new comment on the post ""The Wisconsin State Legislature is considering a ...":

Here's another link to the same story, but this time to a "reputable" media outlet, WISN:

Task Force Finds More Ballots Cast Than Registered Voters

I love the subhead: Mayor Vows To Fix Flawed System

Mark: I followed your link. Very interesting. Thousands more vote than registered. They can account for a hundred with people double voting, and a couple hundred more with convicted felons who shouldn't have been voting. But, ...they have not found any pattern of conspiracy to commit fraud. Mayor Barrett wants resources for training and retraining staff and for investigating. But both the Mayor and the Governor insist that whatever problems occurred wouldn't have been prevented with a Voter ID law. Wow. Before an investigation has even started, they knew that a Voter ID law wouldn't cure the problem. That is like so wow fantastic clever.

That is really cool, Milwaukee having a voter turn out so high. Good trick that: population goes down but the numbers voting goes up. Nothing to see here, just move on. (Or am I shocked, shocked that there is voter fraud going on here!)

Milwaukee is a good candidate for being the most western East Coast City in the nation. They are a smidgen to the west of Chicago, albeit north of that city. What with the strength of the labor unions, the progressive history, manufacturing, shipping and graft.

Des Moines in not an East Coast City. People in Iowa are really polite, even in Des Moines. Is St. Louis more like an East Coast City, or is it Southern?

I love what JFK said about D.C.: It was a mixture of Northern hospitality and Southern efficiency.

I was kind of assuming that changing an address on a license in WI was the same as it is in UT and GA (the two states I'm familiar with).

In those states, you affix the new address via a label to the back of your driver's license. If you're pulled over, the cops ask you "Is this your current home address?" and it better be on your driver's license somewhere.

If you think it's Republicans who block the creation of a national ID card ... well, that's just crazy talk. It wasn't Republicans who went nuts when Georgia passed a law requiring photo ID for voting purposes -- even though the ID was (as you suggest) made free to those lacking a Georgia DL. It wasn't Republicans who freaked out over the suggestion that maybe, just maybe, driver's licenses ought to indicate the immigration status of the license-holder, given that they're now used as all-purpose ID. Wikipedia, being scrupulously even-handed as ever, notes the opposition of the Cato Institute and some gun-rights groups to the REAL ID Act, but really that fight broke down along party lines that you know as well as I do.

Same day registration should be eliminated. Voting day is chaotic enough without accommodating folks who didn't give a shit until the last minute.

Identify yourself. At least to the minimal standard of buying a bottle of wine at pick-n-save. If your run of the mill bouncer would laugh at your ID, let's not accept that to vote.Utility bills? For fscks sake. Where did that come from?

Since we seem so hell bent on becomming a lower tier country-Dip a digit in the purple ink at the time your vote is cast. The ink will replace the "I voted" sticker & be cost neutral. I suppose this will be an affront to minorities, women, multi-voters, young children, union people, and other disenfranchised peoples. Tough shit.

That's an incredible story about Milwaukee, so I looked it up. What actually apparently happened in Milwaukee in 2004 was that about 4500 more people voted than were recorded as voting. Still very bad, but not incredibly so. Apparently there was sloppy reporting initially at the WAPO. See the actual preliminary report.

NC requires you show a SS card with your current address when you get a Driver's License. I had to show my then current license to the SS administration office to get a new SS card last fall so I could renew my license.